click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)
it so incredibly ironic that its proponents thinks these weapons are a problem in the hands of law-abiegd citizens, but apparently see no problem with the same weapons being galorified in hollywood movies or video games, where the game is interactive, violent, and you are literalhooting at people. >> jon: that's one, video games you are not literally shooting at people. ( laughter ) what you're shooting it isaise series of 0s and 1s organized into a two-dimension stall representation of a three-dimensional-- i guess i'm not considering the real-world consequences of checking to see if someone buying a gun on the internet is a convicted felon who moderates a charlie manson message board. "hey, guys, let's not get off topic. you want to talk about 'live with kelly and michael' that's a different board. you have to keep the conversation here manson related." >> in my opinion, adopting mandatory federal government background checks for purely private transactions between law abiding citizens puts u inexoray on the path for a itself registration. >> it is not currently proposed but if
to have a level of security greater than you did back in the olden days if you will. and our laws and our i object ter presentation of the constitution, i think, have to change. >> bill: all right here now to reply to that fox business anchor john stossel. disagree with mayor bloomberg? >> about a ton of things but not that really. these cameras are going to grow and that's okay. i disagree, i don't think the constitution needs to change. the constitution forbids unreasonable searches. i don't think a camera is that. >> we have a right to privacy also. you know, part of the abortion debate was a privacy issue. it you can believe it the supreme court decision roe v. wade. but privacy now what basically is going to happen is happening is once you step out of your house. you don't have any privacy anymore. that's it. >> in many ways you never did. he we reporters were very defensive in saying we the public have a right to take pictures of people. >> on public property, absolute gli. >> when you go too people's homes, that's another story. these cameras are in public. if you are outdoors toda
Search Results 0 to 4 of about 5 (some duplicates have been removed)